| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 13:08:29 -0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@...kjames.pl>,
Mircea Gherzan <mgherzan@...il.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <dxchgb@...il.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Matt Evans <matt@...abs.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 3.12 108/133] bpf: do not use reciprocal divide
3.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
[ Upstream commit aee636c4809fa54848ff07a899b326eb1f9987a2 ]
At first Jakub Zawadzki noticed that some divisions by reciprocal_divide
were not correct. (off by one in some cases)
http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/reciprocal-buggy.c
He could also show this with BPF:
http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/set-and-dump-filter-k-bug.c
The reciprocal divide in linux kernel is not generic enough,
lets remove its use in BPF, as it is not worth the pain with
current cpus.
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Reported-by: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@...kjames.pl>
Cc: Mircea Gherzan <mgherzan@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <dxchgb@...il.com>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Matt Evans <matt@...abs.org>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c | 6 +++---
arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 7 ++++---
arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 14 ++++++++++----
net/core/filter.c | 30 ++----------------------------
6 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
+++ b/arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c
@@ -637,10 +637,10 @@ load_ind:
emit(ARM_MUL(r_A, r_A, r_X), ctx);
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
- /* current k == reciprocal_value(userspace k) */
+ if (k == 1)
+ break;
emit_mov_i(r_scratch, k, ctx);
- /* A = top 32 bits of the product */
- emit(ARM_UMULL(r_scratch, r_A, r_A, r_scratch), ctx);
+ emit_udiv(r_A, r_A, r_scratch, ctx);
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_X:
update_on_xread(ctx);
--- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -209,10 +209,11 @@ static int bpf_jit_build_body(struct sk_
}
PPC_DIVWU(r_A, r_A, r_X);
break;
- case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A = reciprocal_divide(A, K); */
+ case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K */
+ if (K == 1)
+ break;
PPC_LI32(r_scratch1, K);
- /* Top 32 bits of 64bit result -> A */
- PPC_MULHWU(r_A, r_A, r_scratch1);
+ PPC_DIVWU(r_A, r_A, r_scratch1);
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_AND_X:
ctx->seen |= SEEN_XREG;
--- a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -371,11 +371,13 @@ static int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *
/* dr %r4,%r12 */
EMIT2(0x1d4c);
break;
- case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A = reciprocal_divide(A, K) */
- /* m %r4,<d(K)>(%r13) */
- EMIT4_DISP(0x5c40d000, EMIT_CONST(K));
- /* lr %r5,%r4 */
- EMIT2(0x1854);
+ case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K */
+ if (K == 1)
+ break;
+ /* lhi %r4,0 */
+ EMIT4(0xa7480000);
+ /* d %r4,<d(K)>(%r13) */
+ EMIT4_DISP(0x5d40d000, EMIT_CONST(K));
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_X: /* A %= X */
jit->seen |= SEEN_XREG | SEEN_RET0;
@@ -391,6 +393,11 @@ static int bpf_jit_insn(struct bpf_jit *
EMIT2(0x1854);
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_K: /* A %= K */
+ if (K == 1) {
+ /* lhi %r5,0 */
+ EMIT4(0xa7580000);
+ break;
+ }
/* lhi %r4,0 */
EMIT4(0xa7480000);
/* d %r4,<d(K)>(%r13) */
--- a/arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -497,9 +497,20 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *f
case BPF_S_ALU_MUL_K: /* A *= K */
emit_alu_K(MUL, K);
break;
- case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K */
- emit_alu_K(MUL, K);
- emit_read_y(r_A);
+ case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K with K != 0*/
+ if (K == 1)
+ break;
+ emit_write_y(G0);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SPARC32
+ /* The Sparc v8 architecture requires
+ * three instructions between a %y
+ * register write and the first use.
+ */
+ emit_nop();
+ emit_nop();
+ emit_nop();
+#endif
+ emit_alu_K(DIV, K);
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_X: /* A /= X; */
emit_cmpi(r_X, 0);
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -359,15 +359,21 @@ void bpf_jit_compile(struct sk_filter *f
EMIT2(0x89, 0xd0); /* mov %edx,%eax */
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_K: /* A %= K; */
+ if (K == 1) {
+ CLEAR_A();
+ break;
+ }
EMIT2(0x31, 0xd2); /* xor %edx,%edx */
EMIT1(0xb9);EMIT(K, 4); /* mov imm32,%ecx */
EMIT2(0xf7, 0xf1); /* div %ecx */
EMIT2(0x89, 0xd0); /* mov %edx,%eax */
break;
- case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A = reciprocal_divide(A, K); */
- EMIT3(0x48, 0x69, 0xc0); /* imul imm32,%rax,%rax */
- EMIT(K, 4);
- EMIT4(0x48, 0xc1, 0xe8, 0x20); /* shr $0x20,%rax */
+ case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K: /* A /= K */
+ if (K == 1)
+ break;
+ EMIT2(0x31, 0xd2); /* xor %edx,%edx */
+ EMIT1(0xb9);EMIT(K, 4); /* mov imm32,%ecx */
+ EMIT2(0xf7, 0xf1); /* div %ecx */
break;
case BPF_S_ALU_AND_X:
seen |= SEEN_XREG;
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -36,7 +36,6 @@
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
#include <asm/unaligned.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
-#include <linux/reciprocal_div.h>
#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
#include <linux/seccomp.h>
#include <linux/if_vlan.h>
@@ -166,7 +165,7 @@ unsigned int sk_run_filter(const struct
A /= X;
continue;
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
- A = reciprocal_divide(A, K);
+ A /= K;
continue;
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_X:
if (X == 0)
@@ -553,11 +552,6 @@ int sk_chk_filter(struct sock_filter *fi
/* Some instructions need special checks */
switch (code) {
case BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K:
- /* check for division by zero */
- if (ftest->k == 0)
- return -EINVAL;
- ftest->k = reciprocal_value(ftest->k);
- break;
case BPF_S_ALU_MOD_K:
/* check for division by zero */
if (ftest->k == 0)
@@ -853,27 +847,7 @@ void sk_decode_filter(struct sock_filter
to->code = decodes[code];
to->jt = filt->jt;
to->jf = filt->jf;
-
- if (code == BPF_S_ALU_DIV_K) {
- /*
- * When loaded this rule user gave us X, which was
- * translated into R = r(X). Now we calculate the
- * RR = r(R) and report it back. If next time this
- * value is loaded and RRR = r(RR) is calculated
- * then the R == RRR will be true.
- *
- * One exception. X == 1 translates into R == 0 and
- * we can't calculate RR out of it with r().
- */
-
- if (filt->k == 0)
- to->k = 1;
- else
- to->k = reciprocal_value(filt->k);
-
- BUG_ON(reciprocal_value(to->k) != filt->k);
- } else
- to->k = filt->k;
+ to->k = filt->k;
}
int sk_get_filter(struct sock *sk, struct sock_filter __user *ubuf, unsigned int len)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists